Tapping into past design experiences: knowledge sharing and creation during novice–expert design consultations

Abstract

Designing is a knowledge-intensive activity. For novice design engineers, an important means of acquiring knowledge is to consult experienced colleagues. We observed novice-expert consultations as part of three engineering projects in a large aerospace company. Seven meetings were analysed in detail regarding the design activity, the content, and the form of interaction. Although the meetings were initiated for the purpose of information seeking, this process amounted to only 8% of the time compared to knowledge creation between novices and experts (47% of meeting time), and contextual information sharing (45% of meeting time). Both experts and novices were found to contribute equally and interactively to the discussion and analysis of solutions. The analysis showed how the processes alternated in the meetings. We identified tentative patterns on how these consultation processes change over the course of the design process phases. The micro-level analysis of the design activities and form of interaction provided a deeper understanding of how the consultation processes are discursively produced by the experts and novices. Finally, implications for design engineering practitioners are derived and suggestions for further research are provided.

Supporting the development of shared understanding in distributed design teams

“…Second, there is a need to expand the scope and depth of situations covered and the time frame considered in order to better link: works in engineering design (typically focused on specific tasks); and wider research on shared understanding (typically at the project level). In particular, studies such as that by Deken et al (2012) have started to identify the types of questions that are most important to developing shared understanding in design but there has been little research dealing with how this changes over the course of the design process. This is coupled with the need to understand how short term improvements in performance translate into long term improvements at the project level.…”

“…This forms the basis for producing common mental models. Within this process, direct questioning coupled with more discursive exchange plays a key role (Deken et al 2012). Questions form the core of exchanges that bring together fact and reason (Eris 2002), additional context (Aurisicchio, Bracewell, and Wallace 2010), and varied perspectives.…”

“…(Eris 2002). In order to provide an impetus for the types of discussion and interface issues described by Deken et al (2012) and Kleinsmann & Valkenburg (2008) participants were each associated with a specific company profile as described in Section 3.1.…”

“…Further, Herbsleb (2007) (in the software systems domain) highlights the elicitation and communication of requirements, and the orchestration of development, as key issues affected by shared understanding, which are critically linked to similar challenges in the engineering design domain (Hansen, Zhang, and Ahmed-Kristensen 2013). Drawing together prior research in engineering design (Dong 2005;Deken et al 2012) and other domains (DeFranco, Neill, and Clariana 2011;McComb 2007) points to key questions surrounding heterogeneity and the development of shared understanding, particularly in planning type tasks.…”

Comparing the dialogue of experts and novices in interdisciplinary teams to inform design education

“…Student teams may need to be afforded time to research in order to bring about more domain knowledge. In addition as advocated by Deken et al (2012) an important means of acquiring knowledge is to consult experienced colleagues or experts. The provision of analogous cases can also make up for a shortfall in experience and domain knowledge.…”